Translation to English please.
Can't you just run it through google translate? That is what you have done with the 'sources' you quote from in your first post in this thread.
Here, let me give you a very rough translation (only the second half, remember the 100-word rule you completely ignore in your first post):
For me it is a completely incomprehensible attitude. If in such a situation I introduced martial law, I'd bet that a few thousand people may die; and if it turned out that only a few were killed, I'd jumped with joy, and not worry! In 1982 the General not a politician, not a military leader, he only wanted there to be peace and order, no Soviets invading Poland and Solidarnosc not starting a civil war ...
Prof. Norman Davies is right calling the introduction of martial law in 1981, "the most perfect military coup in the history of modern Europe." However, although that the tool was excellent, was anything accomplished with its help?
Accusing the General of causing loss of life is absurd. Yesterday I listened to Adam Słomka call for him to be sentenced for his ciphertext authorizing the military to shoot people. But just a few days ago, parliament passed a law authorizing the military to do exactly the same! Is voting for this act realizing that if in a riot and military uses weapons, the Interior Minister will be condemned and those who voted for this law will be prosecuted in the same way?!? This is absurd: the police and the army weapons so they can use those weapon